40 out of 49 people found the following comment useful :- Best Norwegian movie in years, 14 July 2006
Author:
kraoe from Norway
I watched this movie at the first official showing and I was really,
really impressed.
It deals with its serious issues in a very thoroughly and convincing
manner, without ever becoming sentimental or depressing. It keeps the
pace all through the movie, and the balance between the humor and the
horror is subtle and touching. It has, however, rather many references
to Norwegian culture, and therefore I am curious how the movie will
work for an international audience.
It would be modest to say that this is the best Norwegian movie since
'Aberdeen'.
32 out of 35 people found the following comment useful :- Amazing first feature from a director to watch, 1 April 2007
Author:
Margie24 from New York City
This film is intellectual without being arrogant, hip and stylish
without being pretentious, and brimming with youth and energy without
being juvenile.
On a simplistic level, the film can be described as a coming of age
story about two Oslo twenty-somethings who are writers. The scenes when
they are hanging out with their friends contain witty, realistic
dialogue and interactions. But this is a very rich, complex film. A
unique, fresh narrative structure, depth of emotion, brilliant
character development, beautiful photography, and terrific acting- this
is really a film that has nothing simplistic about it. At times
incisively funny, at other times angst ridden and sad, the film takes
the viewer through the gamut of emotions experienced by the characters.
I didn't always know where the story or characters were going (I don't
think the characters themselves did), but the director/writer was
always in charge and confidently in control of every frame, yet not
manipulative; I was a very satisfied viewer when the credits rolled and
loud applause broke out in the audience at the Museum of Modern Art in
New York City.
Keep your eye on Joachim Trier- he's going places.
26 out of 30 people found the following comment useful :- review from Premier at Karlovy Vary International Film Festival 2006, 15 April 2007
Author:
Ema Culik from United Kingdom
Reprise is the story of two aspiring writers, Phillip and Erik, who
both submit their manuscripts to a publishing house, resulting in the
acceptance and overnight success of Phillip's novel, while Erik's is
returned to him rejected. "It confirmed what I had always thought. I
have no talent whatsoever." The film tells of youthful aspiration,
unanticipated tragedy and what consequences this has on young people as
they try to make a path for themselves through life.
The film opens with Phillip and Erik standing by a postbox, preparing
to send off their literary efforts. Already the scene is tinged with
the dreary greyish blue and grey shades that colour the whole film, the
two boys clothed in black. The dreariness of these colours (trendy as
they are at the moment) add to the film's style but also stains the
action with a frustrated melancholy that reflects that of the
protagonists', as they come up against failure and difficulty. In this
first scene, however, the post box shines out against this backdrop in
deep red, a beacon of hope. Already we see the controlled aesthetic
beauty of the style, and an attention to detail with which the emotions
of the characters are portrayed through visual means.
Six months after Phillip's book is published, we see Erik and Phillip's
other friends pick him up from a psychiatric hospital where he has been
since a mental breakdown that eventually caused him to come to blows
with a glass door. The film treats the issue of madness sensitively and
thoughtfully, inspiring empathy and understanding. The young Anders
Danielsen Lie is excellent as Phillip, playing the troubled but gifted
writer subtly and powerfully. The events are not shown chronologically,
to give weight to those things that made the most crashing impact. For
example, it is not until Phillip's return form hospital that we learn
of the existence of his girlfriend Kari, whom he loved so intensely
that it, according to the psychiatrists, triggered his mental
disintegration. This side of the story is told separately from the
progression of events, giving it a strength that shows just how much it
affected him. Similarly, Trier makes use of flashbacks and mixes up
viewpoints of situations to show them in the way that they would be
remembered - allowing us to understand and associate with the
characters all the more. Also, when we see conversations between
Phillip and Kari, they are often shown to not be speaking, while their
voices play in the soundtrack, and only occasional words are mouthed
out. Such techniques portray a scene filled with emotional closeness,
and show it how it might be remembered - after all the mind does not
retain all details with photographic precision, but holds on more
tightly to those which have some emotional importance.
However, the film is not entirely pervaded by this intense mood, which
might make it too heavy. Trier still has a sense of humour, and that is
what gives the film its completeness. He portrays the charming
silliness of the youths with empathy - for example, their great
admiration for their literary hero. They find his house, and seeing
that he is walking his dog in a nearby park, take a picture where it
seems like Phillip is jovially discussing some fascinating topic with
his hero. The next shot cuts to their discovery that the photo is
completely black. "It helps if you take off the lens cap." Trier's
gentle mockery of the protagonists endears us to them, with their
youthful ineptitude. I also particularly liked the use of text - when
they discover that said hero will probably be present at a book launch
party they are invited to, his name flashes up in white lettering that
fills the screen in a news headline manner that captures their innocent
joy perfectly, and also pokes slight fun at it. In general the film
captures the vivacity and excitement of the characters, though still in
a controlled manner. After we see them post their manuscripts, Erik
narrates a black and white passage which excitedly reels off all their
dreams and hopes where they jet off across the world, meeting weird and
wonderful women and sparking literary debate, and eventually
accidentally find each other again in a café, no, in the street, no, in
the metro.. It becomes all the more tragic of course, after all of
this, to see how things actually turn out. By showing not only the
events of the story, but also the characters' thoughts and memories,
Trier gives a full account of the emotions that the characters endure.
In addition, the importance of friendships and relationships is also
shown through the characters' banter and teasing and stumbles as they
try to find the right way to deal with other people. Their hearts are
open and we are let into them and bond with them as they are swept
along by events.
In the introduction to this film, the audience was told to be kind to
Trier and the rest of the delegation, as this was the international
premier of this debut film - and the director had never had a feature
film shown to any audience ever before. Cheers welcomed them into the
hall. And I have to say, I think they are deserved. This is an
extremely proficient effort for a first film, which combines
sensitivity and dry humour, style and emotional understanding,
excellent acting and cinematic control. It is certainly one of the
strongest films in the competition this year.
20 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :- Quirky, bittersweet, screwball comedy Norwegian style, 2 April 2007
Author:
rasecz from United States
Five good friends. Young men not yet settled into career lives. Two are
trying to become authors. Phillipe gets published quickly, while Erik
is struggling to get his first book out. Phillipe proves to be
suffering from a psychosis that interferes with his writing. That is in
a nutshell the film's backbone. However there is a lot more going on.
The complex narrative with multiple characters is told in a quirky,
original style. Time-lines are heavily sliced. Multiple takes are
intercut into seamless conversations. Explanatory flashbacks are
inserted almost as if they are part of the action. And so on. It's all
fresh, fast moving, and fun to watch.
It is a bittersweet story of young adults leaving behind the carefree
existence of dreamers and gravitating towards the settled lives of
older adults. The characters are well conceived. Their antics and
clever dialogue provide much of the material for the many funny
screwball moments. Great debut film for the director.
13 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :- Excellent but 'different' movie, 3 February 2007
Author:
mr. T from Netherlands
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
This is without doubt a very well made movie. The style of filming and
editing did remind me of the movie "Hawaii, Oslo". However, this movie
deals with friendship, love and mental illness in a group of friends in
their early twenties and is not a fairytale story (as in "Hawaii,
Oslo"). Two of the friends are writers that want to be famous and part
of the literature establishment in Norway. That's why it can be an
advantage to have some knowledge about Norwegian culture, the Norwegian
language and about the city of Oslo. But all is not needed to be
impressed about "Reprise". This because "Reprise" is in the first place
about universal things like interpersonal relationships, sadness and
identity. You can also see this movie as a filmed portrait of a group
of friends. If you see it like that, all main characters are presented
in a warm and positive way. Not as 'bad' or as 'good', but as humans
with shortcomings. The movie is not at all boring or slow. It contains
also a lot of humor (for example when a dog in the park 'attacks'
Erik). The ending of the movie is very a-typical and creative (with a
counting Phillip). If you like stereotypical blockbusters from
Hollywood, violent movies or 'good versus bad' movies, then don't see
this one. But if you, Norwegian or not (and I am not), do like an
excellent movie about human emotions, then this is probably one to been
seen by you. In my opinion, this is a masterpiece. I hope it will be
seen by a large international audience. This movie deserves it.
12 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :- Youthful New Wave-ish wit from Norway, 13 May 2007
Author:
Chris Knipp from Berkeley, California
Joachim Trier's smart, witty first film about a group of talented Oslo
twenty-somethings won a prize at Toronto and was Norway's Oscar entry.
'Reprise' focuses on Erik (Espen Klouman Hoiner, who's blond, and
smiles practically all the time) and Phillip (Anders Danielsen Lie,
dark-haired, crew-cut, and wide-eyed). They're well-off, presentable,
and ambitious young men (and best friends) who try to launch writing
careers by submitting manuscripts at the same moment. They also share a
passion for the same reclusive novelist, Sten Egil Dahl (Sigmund
Saeverud). The film amuses us right away by showing a series of
alternative possible outcomes to the young men's ambitions with
quicksilver editing and a bright voice-over--a light approach which,
with the close artistic friendship in the story's foreground, brings up
memories of the Nouvelle Vague and especially Truffaut's 'Jules et
Jim.' The screenplay, appropriately for a treatment of young people on
the brink of maturity, constantly toys with possibilities, which we
briefly see. Much of its charm is in the editing, but the opening
segment is such a flood of wit, it's a little hard to sustain it.
Moreover things turn a bit more Nordic and dark when Philip is the one
to get published first, but immediately has a psychotic episode--partly
attributed by doctors and family to his "obsessive" love for his
girlfriend Kari (Viktoria Winge)--that lands him for a while in a
sanatorium. Much of the film that follows deals with the problems for
Phillip and the problems Phillip poses for others after his psychosis
emerges.
Now Erik gets a MS. accepted, a little novel (we guess) called
'Prosopopeia.' He thinks that with this event, he must end his
relationship with his longtime girlfriend Lillian (Silje Hagen) -- a
decision perpetually put off that may recall Matthieu Amalric's
wavering over Emmanuelle Devos in Arnaud Desplechin's similar study of
a group of (a bit older) intellectual young people, the 1996 'My Sex
Life. . .or How I Got Into an Argument.'
Reprise is full of little ironies, some a bit obvious. There's one
friend who acts as a mentor for the guys. He says not to have
girlfriends -- they'll make you settle into a life of watching TV
series and having nice dinners and give you too little time to read and
listen to music, he says. Then, wouldn't you know it, he's the first
one to wind up married and living the bourgeois family life. Another
easy irony is the way the pretty editor at Phillip's publisher's is
first utterly repelled by an older punk rock band friend's politically
incorrect and offense chatter, then later is drawn to him like a magnet
and marries him.
The film's co-writer Eskil Vogt studied at La Feris, and his French
residence comes out in the way two segments of Reprise take place in
Paris, where Philip and Kari first discover they're in love and where
they go back after his mental problems to recapture the feeling, with
mixed success.
Erik and Phillip know where the reclusive Sten Egil Dahl lives and
occasionally spy on him. Phillip shoots Erik on a bench pretending to
talk with the writer but forgets to remove the lens cap so the photo is
a blank. Undeterred, Erik enlarges the resulting black rectangle and
hangs it in a prominent place on his wall. Later it turns up as an
emblem on the jacket of his book.
Erik performs badly on TV after 'Prosopopeia' is out (arguments over
the odd title stand in for a young author's stubborn missteps). He
refuses to acknowledge a personal element in his references to
psychosis, or anything else for that matter, in his book; and such
reticence doesn't go over well on the boob tube. He also reflexively
uses a lot of affected finger "quote" marks imitating their mentor,
making him look the fool even to his friends. But, in another quick
irony, Sten Egil Dahl sees the show, reads Erik's book, and, rescuing
him from a mugger, reassures him that he did right on television and
that he likes his novel -- or most of it, anyway.
Phillip's psychosis seems to come and go. He can't write any more --
but then he does, though it's unsuccessful, as Erik feels obliged as a
best friend to tell him. Phillip has a habit of counting from ten down
to zero and we may think when he gets to zero one day he's going to
throw himself off a roof or in front of a truck. The darker side is
always there, but also the light side. That's why, Trier says, he used
lots of punk music but also French poetry in his film. Part of the
pleasure in this enjoyable, fresh piece of work is the sense of a group
of talented, bright young people at work together making it. The punk
band is part of the way the film fills in a whole group of friends from
this generation of whom Phillip and Erik are only the foreground.
Norwegian film-making plainly is infused with plenty of new blood and
in a good period: there were plenty of Norwegian competitors for their
Oscar submission this year.
Shown at the San Francisco International Film Festival 2007.
13 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :- It's been a long time..., 16 December 2007
Author:
pierre_manon from Canada
Since I saw a movie that i could relate to as much. In some ways it
really felt like my life with my group of friends when I was longer.
I truly enjoyed that movie, there is a feeling to it and the
cinematography is excellent. The actors were amazing. I went to look at
their profile and it seems that most of them don't have a lot of
experience but it doesn't show, on the contrary, there is a freshness
to their performance, they are quite good.
The Soundtrack is amazing, from Joy Division to New Order and other
cool music that unfortunately I don't know yet about. Totally what I
needed to watch in the cold snow storm coming down right now in
Montréal.
See it!
19 out of 32 people found the following comment useful :- Fresh blood in Norwegian film-making, 16 July 2006
Author:
preb1 from Norway
I'm happy to finally see a well written and well directed Norwegian
movie, that have lost all the "arch-norwgian lines and way of acting"
The cast is mostly newcomers,that raises the level of the established
filmmakers and actors in Norway. Finally a line works naturally in
Norwegian. The movie is about two young writers and their friendship,
love and insanity. The story is edited nicely together, and shifts
through real life events and the possible, fantasy events Eskil Vogt
has written a drama that makes you emotionally evolved in laughter,
tears, anger and despair.This is a nice credible piece of film, but
still i've got a hunch that it will be soon forgotten...
8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :- Incredible Debut Film!!!, 29 August 2007
Author:
threehourboner
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
UHMAAAAAAZZING...I saw this at the San Francisco Film Festival, and the
movie immediately shot into my top ten movies of all time.
The film centers on two best friends, both writers: Philip, whose debut
novel has already catapulted him to literary frame and dropped him hard
into mental anguish, and Erik, whose manuscript was rejected, now
trying to bring Philip back to his old self.
what's masterfully portrayed is the writer's mind.
As Erik's life remains charmed, even exciting as his own manuscript is
about to be published, Philip's mind is fractured...words and events
slip from here and there, time is broken. His sudden rise and fall has
robbed Philip of his identity. Instead of living his life, he tries to
piece it together like a book, imbuing himself with the emotions, the
love, that once was there. But like writer's block, he fails, and no
amount of friendly encouragement from Erik can penetrate Philip's
problems.
Philip turns to desperate measures--a bike ride down the hill, eyes
closed. For once the raw emotions of mortal fear and exhilaration
restores his humanity--and he returns home and furiously writes again,
his first time in months. But again, his output is no good, his
expectations thwarted, his life, once more without meaning or
direction.
Its ambiguous end is particularly effective. It feels real, but you can
also sense that it's a well-crafted happy ending imagined by a gifted
writer.
It all sounds terribly depressing...but Reprise is not. It's full of
humor and pathos, and never errs into pretentiousness. I just hope
Joachim Trier, with his incredible film debut, won't burn out quickly
like his character Philip.
4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :- I wish we could just meet all over again Reprise, 2 August 2008
Author:
babubhaut from buffalo, ny, usa
Joachim Trier has definitely accomplished something with his debut
feature film. The opening sequence is so disorienting that you can't
begin to expect what will happen next. Showing a montage of what
"could" happen once our two leads mail out their manuscripts, from
success to failure to meeting again and succeeding together, is a bold
move. I wasn't sure if we had just been privy to the entire film
condensed and would soon see the details, or if the title of the film
would be taken literally and we'd see a Reprise of the events. Of
course, the latter is what occurred. After the montage, we are
transported back to that fateful moment of their first novels being
submitted for publishing. This time, however, in the real world, only
Phillip succeeds in getting a book deal done while Erik is rejected to
try again. Both young men then find their lives going in different
directions only to converge once more at a dark place for both, a time
for a rebirth in life for Phillip and career for Erik.
The gimmick of showing the audience multiple vignettes of the past
throughout the film never seems forced. Always seamlessly giving us
insight and background into the proceedings, these teleportations
through time help flesh out our characters and their motivations. We
learn how these two writers got mixed up with a group of friends a
little rougher around the edges than them, how Phillip and his
girlfriend Kari met, the boys' affinity for author Sten Egil Dahl, and
much more. The most brilliant use is when Phillip and Kari go to Paris
to relive the journey that made them fall in love the first time. A
trip where he hopes to regain those feelings he had been programmed to
forget during his stint in a mental hospital, the mixing of scenes from
the first time and this current time are nice. The dialogue is
overlapping the images, sporadically rejoining with the mouth movements
of the characters before getting unsynched again. Words and images
don't necessarily have to converge here, whether it the voice of the
leads or that of the narrator. A story is being told; we are shown what
could happen in their lives, not necessarily the end all.
When the final black screen of Stop is shown, you begin to wonder what
other way the story could have gone. What could have happened if Erik
found initial success and not Phillip? Would the latter's psychosis
still have cropped up? Would Erik have fallen fast into pretentiousness
like fellow writer Mathis Wergeland? Who knows? Trier just gives us a
glimpse of this one way that it can happen, and for once it is not the
easy way out. What continues on as a tragedy, one where you can just
feel something horrific will occur, to the point where the director
puts us in a sequence that screams suicide is made all the more
powerful by the prospect of happiness at the end. The opening
introduction ends on a happy note, so there is always hope the meat of
the film will too, despite the allusions to epic tragedy of Icarus
flying too close to the sun.
Overall, the actual activity of writing a novel has little to do with
the meaning of the film. It is just the occupation of these two men,
the driving force of their lives and impetus for how they live. What
Reprise truly concerns is the meaning of life and how one chooses to
live it. It is a cyclical path bringing people in and out of each
other's vision for good or worse at the most random times.
Relationships play a huge role as well, whether they are romantic or
platonic. Erik and Phillip have a bond with one another, a bond that
had been forged at a very young age. The two compete yet also prop the
other up when they need it most. At times there is jealousy and hatred,
but never at their cores. The inclusion of Lillian and Kari only show
both men's insecurities in themselves; Erik keeping Lillian away from
the friends he hangs with and Phillip unable to accept the profound
love he has for Kari. Both writers have dreams, but they are young, and
achieving them too fast can have a profound effect on even the
strongest soul.
This strong story and deftly handled craft is bolstered by a couple
brilliant performances. Sure the group is fun to join with on their
excursionsa party towards the end is a lot of funyet the main three
shine above all else. Viktoria Winge is stunning as Kari, so deeply in
love with her broken man, she is willing to pick up the pieces of their
relationship after his time away getting help. Trying her hardest to
stay patient with Phillip, she does everything in her power to make him
remember what it was they felt upon meeting, to smile at the memory of
him saying they were always destined to meet and be together. Espen
Klouman-Høiner as Erik is very good as well. He is the rock of the
group, the one with his head on straight always attempting to help
those around him, sometimes at the neglect of himself. At the end, when
faced with the dilemma of staying around to help or going away from
Oslo to clear his mind and hone his apparent skills from his first
novel, the decision weighs deeply upon him. Lastly, and most
importantly, is Ander Danielsen Lie portraying Phillip. A deeply
emotive soul, he is one who needs to break and fail in order to except
the fact that he is fallible. Getting all he wants so early only eats
away at him, making him feel that it is undeserved. Needing to find
alignment again, it takes time and pain to be able to live once more is
happiness.
Own the rights?
Buy it at AmazonMore at IMDb Pro Discuss in Boards Add to My Movies Update Data
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summaryplot synopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsIMDb user comments for
Reprise (2006) More at IMDb Pro »
40 out of 49 people found the following comment useful :-

Best Norwegian movie in years, 14 July 2006
Author: kraoe from Norway
I watched this movie at the first official showing and I was really, really impressed.
It deals with its serious issues in a very thoroughly and convincing manner, without ever becoming sentimental or depressing. It keeps the pace all through the movie, and the balance between the humor and the horror is subtle and touching. It has, however, rather many references to Norwegian culture, and therefore I am curious how the movie will work for an international audience.
It would be modest to say that this is the best Norwegian movie since 'Aberdeen'.
32 out of 35 people found the following comment useful :-

Amazing first feature from a director to watch, 1 April 2007
Author: Margie24 from New York City
This film is intellectual without being arrogant, hip and stylish without being pretentious, and brimming with youth and energy without being juvenile.
On a simplistic level, the film can be described as a coming of age story about two Oslo twenty-somethings who are writers. The scenes when they are hanging out with their friends contain witty, realistic dialogue and interactions. But this is a very rich, complex film. A unique, fresh narrative structure, depth of emotion, brilliant character development, beautiful photography, and terrific acting- this is really a film that has nothing simplistic about it. At times incisively funny, at other times angst ridden and sad, the film takes the viewer through the gamut of emotions experienced by the characters.
I didn't always know where the story or characters were going (I don't think the characters themselves did), but the director/writer was always in charge and confidently in control of every frame, yet not manipulative; I was a very satisfied viewer when the credits rolled and loud applause broke out in the audience at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City.
Keep your eye on Joachim Trier- he's going places.
26 out of 30 people found the following comment useful :-

review from Premier at Karlovy Vary International Film Festival 2006, 15 April 2007
Author: Ema Culik from United Kingdom
Reprise is the story of two aspiring writers, Phillip and Erik, who both submit their manuscripts to a publishing house, resulting in the acceptance and overnight success of Phillip's novel, while Erik's is returned to him rejected. "It confirmed what I had always thought. I have no talent whatsoever." The film tells of youthful aspiration, unanticipated tragedy and what consequences this has on young people as they try to make a path for themselves through life.
The film opens with Phillip and Erik standing by a postbox, preparing to send off their literary efforts. Already the scene is tinged with the dreary greyish blue and grey shades that colour the whole film, the two boys clothed in black. The dreariness of these colours (trendy as they are at the moment) add to the film's style but also stains the action with a frustrated melancholy that reflects that of the protagonists', as they come up against failure and difficulty. In this first scene, however, the post box shines out against this backdrop in deep red, a beacon of hope. Already we see the controlled aesthetic beauty of the style, and an attention to detail with which the emotions of the characters are portrayed through visual means.
Six months after Phillip's book is published, we see Erik and Phillip's other friends pick him up from a psychiatric hospital where he has been since a mental breakdown that eventually caused him to come to blows with a glass door. The film treats the issue of madness sensitively and thoughtfully, inspiring empathy and understanding. The young Anders Danielsen Lie is excellent as Phillip, playing the troubled but gifted writer subtly and powerfully. The events are not shown chronologically, to give weight to those things that made the most crashing impact. For example, it is not until Phillip's return form hospital that we learn of the existence of his girlfriend Kari, whom he loved so intensely that it, according to the psychiatrists, triggered his mental disintegration. This side of the story is told separately from the progression of events, giving it a strength that shows just how much it affected him. Similarly, Trier makes use of flashbacks and mixes up viewpoints of situations to show them in the way that they would be remembered - allowing us to understand and associate with the characters all the more. Also, when we see conversations between Phillip and Kari, they are often shown to not be speaking, while their voices play in the soundtrack, and only occasional words are mouthed out. Such techniques portray a scene filled with emotional closeness, and show it how it might be remembered - after all the mind does not retain all details with photographic precision, but holds on more tightly to those which have some emotional importance.
However, the film is not entirely pervaded by this intense mood, which might make it too heavy. Trier still has a sense of humour, and that is what gives the film its completeness. He portrays the charming silliness of the youths with empathy - for example, their great admiration for their literary hero. They find his house, and seeing that he is walking his dog in a nearby park, take a picture where it seems like Phillip is jovially discussing some fascinating topic with his hero. The next shot cuts to their discovery that the photo is completely black. "It helps if you take off the lens cap." Trier's gentle mockery of the protagonists endears us to them, with their youthful ineptitude. I also particularly liked the use of text - when they discover that said hero will probably be present at a book launch party they are invited to, his name flashes up in white lettering that fills the screen in a news headline manner that captures their innocent joy perfectly, and also pokes slight fun at it. In general the film captures the vivacity and excitement of the characters, though still in a controlled manner. After we see them post their manuscripts, Erik narrates a black and white passage which excitedly reels off all their dreams and hopes where they jet off across the world, meeting weird and wonderful women and sparking literary debate, and eventually accidentally find each other again in a café, no, in the street, no, in the metro.. It becomes all the more tragic of course, after all of this, to see how things actually turn out. By showing not only the events of the story, but also the characters' thoughts and memories, Trier gives a full account of the emotions that the characters endure. In addition, the importance of friendships and relationships is also shown through the characters' banter and teasing and stumbles as they try to find the right way to deal with other people. Their hearts are open and we are let into them and bond with them as they are swept along by events.
In the introduction to this film, the audience was told to be kind to Trier and the rest of the delegation, as this was the international premier of this debut film - and the director had never had a feature film shown to any audience ever before. Cheers welcomed them into the hall. And I have to say, I think they are deserved. This is an extremely proficient effort for a first film, which combines sensitivity and dry humour, style and emotional understanding, excellent acting and cinematic control. It is certainly one of the strongest films in the competition this year.
20 out of 23 people found the following comment useful :-

Quirky, bittersweet, screwball comedy Norwegian style, 2 April 2007
Author: rasecz from United States
Five good friends. Young men not yet settled into career lives. Two are trying to become authors. Phillipe gets published quickly, while Erik is struggling to get his first book out. Phillipe proves to be suffering from a psychosis that interferes with his writing. That is in a nutshell the film's backbone. However there is a lot more going on.
The complex narrative with multiple characters is told in a quirky, original style. Time-lines are heavily sliced. Multiple takes are intercut into seamless conversations. Explanatory flashbacks are inserted almost as if they are part of the action. And so on. It's all fresh, fast moving, and fun to watch.
It is a bittersweet story of young adults leaving behind the carefree existence of dreamers and gravitating towards the settled lives of older adults. The characters are well conceived. Their antics and clever dialogue provide much of the material for the many funny screwball moments. Great debut film for the director.
13 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-

Excellent but 'different' movie, 3 February 2007
Author: mr. T from Netherlands
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
This is without doubt a very well made movie. The style of filming and editing did remind me of the movie "Hawaii, Oslo". However, this movie deals with friendship, love and mental illness in a group of friends in their early twenties and is not a fairytale story (as in "Hawaii, Oslo"). Two of the friends are writers that want to be famous and part of the literature establishment in Norway. That's why it can be an advantage to have some knowledge about Norwegian culture, the Norwegian language and about the city of Oslo. But all is not needed to be impressed about "Reprise". This because "Reprise" is in the first place about universal things like interpersonal relationships, sadness and identity. You can also see this movie as a filmed portrait of a group of friends. If you see it like that, all main characters are presented in a warm and positive way. Not as 'bad' or as 'good', but as humans with shortcomings. The movie is not at all boring or slow. It contains also a lot of humor (for example when a dog in the park 'attacks' Erik). The ending of the movie is very a-typical and creative (with a counting Phillip). If you like stereotypical blockbusters from Hollywood, violent movies or 'good versus bad' movies, then don't see this one. But if you, Norwegian or not (and I am not), do like an excellent movie about human emotions, then this is probably one to been seen by you. In my opinion, this is a masterpiece. I hope it will be seen by a large international audience. This movie deserves it.
12 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-

Youthful New Wave-ish wit from Norway, 13 May 2007
Author: Chris Knipp from Berkeley, California
Joachim Trier's smart, witty first film about a group of talented Oslo twenty-somethings won a prize at Toronto and was Norway's Oscar entry. 'Reprise' focuses on Erik (Espen Klouman Hoiner, who's blond, and smiles practically all the time) and Phillip (Anders Danielsen Lie, dark-haired, crew-cut, and wide-eyed). They're well-off, presentable, and ambitious young men (and best friends) who try to launch writing careers by submitting manuscripts at the same moment. They also share a passion for the same reclusive novelist, Sten Egil Dahl (Sigmund Saeverud). The film amuses us right away by showing a series of alternative possible outcomes to the young men's ambitions with quicksilver editing and a bright voice-over--a light approach which, with the close artistic friendship in the story's foreground, brings up memories of the Nouvelle Vague and especially Truffaut's 'Jules et Jim.' The screenplay, appropriately for a treatment of young people on the brink of maturity, constantly toys with possibilities, which we briefly see. Much of its charm is in the editing, but the opening segment is such a flood of wit, it's a little hard to sustain it.
Moreover things turn a bit more Nordic and dark when Philip is the one to get published first, but immediately has a psychotic episode--partly attributed by doctors and family to his "obsessive" love for his girlfriend Kari (Viktoria Winge)--that lands him for a while in a sanatorium. Much of the film that follows deals with the problems for Phillip and the problems Phillip poses for others after his psychosis emerges.
Now Erik gets a MS. accepted, a little novel (we guess) called 'Prosopopeia.' He thinks that with this event, he must end his relationship with his longtime girlfriend Lillian (Silje Hagen) -- a decision perpetually put off that may recall Matthieu Amalric's wavering over Emmanuelle Devos in Arnaud Desplechin's similar study of a group of (a bit older) intellectual young people, the 1996 'My Sex Life. . .or How I Got Into an Argument.'
Reprise is full of little ironies, some a bit obvious. There's one friend who acts as a mentor for the guys. He says not to have girlfriends -- they'll make you settle into a life of watching TV series and having nice dinners and give you too little time to read and listen to music, he says. Then, wouldn't you know it, he's the first one to wind up married and living the bourgeois family life. Another easy irony is the way the pretty editor at Phillip's publisher's is first utterly repelled by an older punk rock band friend's politically incorrect and offense chatter, then later is drawn to him like a magnet and marries him.
The film's co-writer Eskil Vogt studied at La Feris, and his French residence comes out in the way two segments of Reprise take place in Paris, where Philip and Kari first discover they're in love and where they go back after his mental problems to recapture the feeling, with mixed success.
Erik and Phillip know where the reclusive Sten Egil Dahl lives and occasionally spy on him. Phillip shoots Erik on a bench pretending to talk with the writer but forgets to remove the lens cap so the photo is a blank. Undeterred, Erik enlarges the resulting black rectangle and hangs it in a prominent place on his wall. Later it turns up as an emblem on the jacket of his book.
Erik performs badly on TV after 'Prosopopeia' is out (arguments over the odd title stand in for a young author's stubborn missteps). He refuses to acknowledge a personal element in his references to psychosis, or anything else for that matter, in his book; and such reticence doesn't go over well on the boob tube. He also reflexively uses a lot of affected finger "quote" marks imitating their mentor, making him look the fool even to his friends. But, in another quick irony, Sten Egil Dahl sees the show, reads Erik's book, and, rescuing him from a mugger, reassures him that he did right on television and that he likes his novel -- or most of it, anyway.
Phillip's psychosis seems to come and go. He can't write any more -- but then he does, though it's unsuccessful, as Erik feels obliged as a best friend to tell him. Phillip has a habit of counting from ten down to zero and we may think when he gets to zero one day he's going to throw himself off a roof or in front of a truck. The darker side is always there, but also the light side. That's why, Trier says, he used lots of punk music but also French poetry in his film. Part of the pleasure in this enjoyable, fresh piece of work is the sense of a group of talented, bright young people at work together making it. The punk band is part of the way the film fills in a whole group of friends from this generation of whom Phillip and Erik are only the foreground. Norwegian film-making plainly is infused with plenty of new blood and in a good period: there were plenty of Norwegian competitors for their Oscar submission this year.
Shown at the San Francisco International Film Festival 2007.
13 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-

It's been a long time..., 16 December 2007
Author: pierre_manon from Canada
Since I saw a movie that i could relate to as much. In some ways it really felt like my life with my group of friends when I was longer.
I truly enjoyed that movie, there is a feeling to it and the cinematography is excellent. The actors were amazing. I went to look at their profile and it seems that most of them don't have a lot of experience but it doesn't show, on the contrary, there is a freshness to their performance, they are quite good.
The Soundtrack is amazing, from Joy Division to New Order and other cool music that unfortunately I don't know yet about. Totally what I needed to watch in the cold snow storm coming down right now in Montréal.
See it!
19 out of 32 people found the following comment useful :-

Fresh blood in Norwegian film-making, 16 July 2006
Author: preb1 from Norway
I'm happy to finally see a well written and well directed Norwegian movie, that have lost all the "arch-norwgian lines and way of acting" The cast is mostly newcomers,that raises the level of the established filmmakers and actors in Norway. Finally a line works naturally in Norwegian. The movie is about two young writers and their friendship, love and insanity. The story is edited nicely together, and shifts through real life events and the possible, fantasy events Eskil Vogt has written a drama that makes you emotionally evolved in laughter, tears, anger and despair.This is a nice credible piece of film, but still i've got a hunch that it will be soon forgotten...
8 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-

Incredible Debut Film!!!, 29 August 2007
Author: threehourboner
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
UHMAAAAAAZZING...I saw this at the San Francisco Film Festival, and the movie immediately shot into my top ten movies of all time.
The film centers on two best friends, both writers: Philip, whose debut novel has already catapulted him to literary frame and dropped him hard into mental anguish, and Erik, whose manuscript was rejected, now trying to bring Philip back to his old self.
what's masterfully portrayed is the writer's mind.
As Erik's life remains charmed, even exciting as his own manuscript is about to be published, Philip's mind is fractured...words and events slip from here and there, time is broken. His sudden rise and fall has robbed Philip of his identity. Instead of living his life, he tries to piece it together like a book, imbuing himself with the emotions, the love, that once was there. But like writer's block, he fails, and no amount of friendly encouragement from Erik can penetrate Philip's problems.
Philip turns to desperate measures--a bike ride down the hill, eyes closed. For once the raw emotions of mortal fear and exhilaration restores his humanity--and he returns home and furiously writes again, his first time in months. But again, his output is no good, his expectations thwarted, his life, once more without meaning or direction.
Its ambiguous end is particularly effective. It feels real, but you can also sense that it's a well-crafted happy ending imagined by a gifted writer.
It all sounds terribly depressing...but Reprise is not. It's full of humor and pathos, and never errs into pretentiousness. I just hope Joachim Trier, with his incredible film debut, won't burn out quickly like his character Philip.
4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-

I wish we could just meet all over again Reprise, 2 August 2008
Author: babubhaut from buffalo, ny, usa
Joachim Trier has definitely accomplished something with his debut feature film. The opening sequence is so disorienting that you can't begin to expect what will happen next. Showing a montage of what "could" happen once our two leads mail out their manuscripts, from success to failure to meeting again and succeeding together, is a bold move. I wasn't sure if we had just been privy to the entire film condensed and would soon see the details, or if the title of the film would be taken literally and we'd see a Reprise of the events. Of course, the latter is what occurred. After the montage, we are transported back to that fateful moment of their first novels being submitted for publishing. This time, however, in the real world, only Phillip succeeds in getting a book deal done while Erik is rejected to try again. Both young men then find their lives going in different directions only to converge once more at a dark place for both, a time for a rebirth in life for Phillip and career for Erik.
The gimmick of showing the audience multiple vignettes of the past throughout the film never seems forced. Always seamlessly giving us insight and background into the proceedings, these teleportations through time help flesh out our characters and their motivations. We learn how these two writers got mixed up with a group of friends a little rougher around the edges than them, how Phillip and his girlfriend Kari met, the boys' affinity for author Sten Egil Dahl, and much more. The most brilliant use is when Phillip and Kari go to Paris to relive the journey that made them fall in love the first time. A trip where he hopes to regain those feelings he had been programmed to forget during his stint in a mental hospital, the mixing of scenes from the first time and this current time are nice. The dialogue is overlapping the images, sporadically rejoining with the mouth movements of the characters before getting unsynched again. Words and images don't necessarily have to converge here, whether it the voice of the leads or that of the narrator. A story is being told; we are shown what could happen in their lives, not necessarily the end all.
When the final black screen of Stop is shown, you begin to wonder what other way the story could have gone. What could have happened if Erik found initial success and not Phillip? Would the latter's psychosis still have cropped up? Would Erik have fallen fast into pretentiousness like fellow writer Mathis Wergeland? Who knows? Trier just gives us a glimpse of this one way that it can happen, and for once it is not the easy way out. What continues on as a tragedy, one where you can just feel something horrific will occur, to the point where the director puts us in a sequence that screams suicide is made all the more powerful by the prospect of happiness at the end. The opening introduction ends on a happy note, so there is always hope the meat of the film will too, despite the allusions to epic tragedy of Icarus flying too close to the sun.
Overall, the actual activity of writing a novel has little to do with the meaning of the film. It is just the occupation of these two men, the driving force of their lives and impetus for how they live. What Reprise truly concerns is the meaning of life and how one chooses to live it. It is a cyclical path bringing people in and out of each other's vision for good or worse at the most random times. Relationships play a huge role as well, whether they are romantic or platonic. Erik and Phillip have a bond with one another, a bond that had been forged at a very young age. The two compete yet also prop the other up when they need it most. At times there is jealousy and hatred, but never at their cores. The inclusion of Lillian and Kari only show both men's insecurities in themselves; Erik keeping Lillian away from the friends he hangs with and Phillip unable to accept the profound love he has for Kari. Both writers have dreams, but they are young, and achieving them too fast can have a profound effect on even the strongest soul.
This strong story and deftly handled craft is bolstered by a couple brilliant performances. Sure the group is fun to join with on their excursionsa party towards the end is a lot of funyet the main three shine above all else. Viktoria Winge is stunning as Kari, so deeply in love with her broken man, she is willing to pick up the pieces of their relationship after his time away getting help. Trying her hardest to stay patient with Phillip, she does everything in her power to make him remember what it was they felt upon meeting, to smile at the memory of him saying they were always destined to meet and be together. Espen Klouman-Høiner as Erik is very good as well. He is the rock of the group, the one with his head on straight always attempting to help those around him, sometimes at the neglect of himself. At the end, when faced with the dilemma of staying around to help or going away from Oslo to clear his mind and hone his apparent skills from his first novel, the decision weighs deeply upon him. Lastly, and most importantly, is Ander Danielsen Lie portraying Phillip. A deeply emotive soul, he is one who needs to break and fail in order to except the fact that he is fallible. Getting all he wants so early only eats away at him, making him feel that it is undeserved. Needing to find alignment again, it takes time and pain to be able to live once more is happiness.
Add another comment
Related Links